Whether family court proceeded in absence of jurisdiction and absent a justiciable controversy, thereby violating the Due Process Clause of the Fourteenth Amendment and warranting a writ of habeas corpus.

Whether family court impaired the obligations of contracts in violation of U.S. Const. Article I, § 10, Clause 1 by allowing, enabling, and facilitating Owen's felony perjury to abrogate the parenting covenant.

Whether the family court accusation of "credible threat" levied upon Petitioner was void for vagueness.

Whether Petitioner's right to due process was violated when court clerks and sheriff deputies barred Petitioner from case records and courtrooms.

Whether Respondent Keenan's secretive consultation of the Judicial Information System constituted a de facto Star Chamber proceeding.

Whether family court's trial in absentia violated Due Process.

Whether the coordinated discriminatory animus by judges, attorneys, and the mother of A.R.W. against Petitioner's religious beliefs was the direct and proximate cause of the imposition of excessive fines, or cruel and unusual punishments, upon Petitioner in violation Eighth Amendment to the U.S. Constitution.

Whether family court violated U.S. Const. Article I, § 9, Clause 3 by imposing a Bill of Pains and Penalties upon Petitioner's class.

Whether family court violated the Thirteenth Amendment to the U.S. Constitution by subjecting Petitioner to involuntary servitude as a condition of familial association with his minor son, A.R.W.

Whether a parent has the right to advocate for the rights of their minor child in federal court, and thereby seek a writ of habeas corpus to arrest the unlawful imprisonment of themself and their minor child.

Whether family court proceeded in absence of jurisdiction and absent a justiciable controversy, thereby violating the Due Process Clause of the Fourteenth Amendment and warranting a writ of habeas corpus